Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 36448 (AP)

K. JAYARAM, MEDAK DIST. v. BHARATH DYNAMICS LTD., HYD & 3 OTHRS

WP/28258/2011 · 2025-07-10

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010594322011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 28258/2011 Between: 1. K. JAYARAM, S/O LATE NARASAIAH BDL EMPLOYEE 177/B, BDL/TOWNSHIP, BHANOOR, MEDAK DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. BHARATH DYNAMICS LTD (GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE), REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, KANCHAN BAGH, HYDERABAD. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, BDL, BHANOOR, MEDAK DISTRICT. 3. THE GENRAL MANAGER PA, CENTRAL PUBLIS INFORMATION OFFICER, KANCHANBAGH, HYDERABAD. 4. THE DEUTY GENERAL MANAGER P A, BHNOOR, MEDAK DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the Nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not paying/disbursing the salary to the petitioner from February, 2010 to till date as illegal, arbitrary, improper, and in violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the fundamental rights and consequently direct the respondent to pay the salary to the petitioner. IA NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP 34888 OF 2011 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to pay the salary to the petitioner forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition. 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PARTY-IN-PERSON Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K SRINIVASA MURTHY 2. The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 28258 of 2011 ORDER: Despite the matter listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there is no representation for the petitioner. It evinces that the petitioner has no interest in prosecuting his case. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date : 11.07.2025 SPP 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Writ Petition No:28258 of 2011 Date : 11.07.2025 SPP